Letters

The appointment of West Islip-based former policeman and Century 21 real estate agent Anthony Carter as Southampton Village administrator has raised several red flags.

Foremost among them is the absence of a formal contract despite his substantial taxpayer-funded salary of $160,000. This situation not only represents a serious lapse in standard administrative protocol, it also brings into question the Village Board’s commitment to transparency, fiscal responsibility and diversity in its hiring practices.

Compounding these concerns is the fact that key responsibilities traditionally associated with the administrator’s role, particularly budget management, are reportedly being handled by another individual. This discrepancy casts doubt on the rationale behind this high-salary appointment and what specific duties Mr. Carter is fulfilling to justify his compensation.

Furthermore, in light of Southampton Village’s commitment to diversity and equitable representation, the process behind this appointment is concerning. With a Diversity Committee in place, one would expect that appointments reflect our community’s diversity and that a broad range of candidates are considered. Were women, individuals from diverse backgrounds or candidates with strong financial expertise given a fair opportunity in this process?

The lack of transparency in this hiring decision undermines the principles of inclusive representation and equal opportunity, which are critical to fair and effective governance.

These issues collectively paint a picture of a Village Board decision that is not only fiscally irresponsible but also potentially neglectful of the values of diversity and meritocracy.

The residents of Southampton Village deserve governance that is responsible, transparent and fully aligned with the principles of diversity and equal opportunity. The Southampton Village trustees must address these concerns and provide the community with the clarity and accountability it rightfully deserves.

David Rung

Southampton Village